User talk:Nbwrites/sandbox

Helloes! Moved the page out of Nbwrites' sandbox and into the great wide open spaces of WP! Ria4983 sbnrj33 15:58, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you Ria4938! Hadassahd (talk) 02:24, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi hi! I think I am totally missing something here....because everything appears to still be in the sandbox and not on The Wealth of Networks page. Is it just me, or is that the case?Nbwrites (talk) 03:38, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Hey all! -- Added some minor changes (paragraph breaks). What still needs working on/which sections have not been working on yet? I'm ready and willing. Can also copyedit, if no one else wants to. sbnrj33 17:20, 3 March 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ria4983 (talk • contribs)

Hi everyone -- I added to the three sections Naomi started from my notes from last semester. Whoo. This is a BOG book and feels hard to summate. How are other folks doing? Feel free to reformulate, change, hack apart my writing. It's very draft and I'm not attached to it being "right".Hadassahd (talk) 02:43, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Good work so far :) Banaticus (talk) 06:49, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

I agree good start! Keep going!--Theredproject (talk) 18:35, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Reposted from the article talk page: I would suggest two things: 1. delegate and jump in. It seems like Nbwrites and Hadassahd have sort of self-selected their areas, but i would encourage a more formal delineation of who does what. You can self select, or at this point, Nbwrites and Hadassahd should feel free to delegate, as they have most likely have the best sense of what needs to be done, having done most of the writing so far. 2. move your discussion to the sandbox talk page.--Theredproject (talk) 18:41, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Hello all! I just inserted a large chunk of content into the reception section - it is also VERY draft - kind of rough at the moment, so the flow is not great. As always, feel free to change/edit things - and I will continue with more content insertion tomorrow, and hopefully clean it up a little bit. Some questions for everyone: 1) Are we happy with attacking the summary of the book under the three larger headings Benkler used? 2) I have a lot of blog post citations in the reception section - does it look like I've inserted the citation correctly, or is there a better format for a blog post citation? Nbwrites (talk) 04:02, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi team. So. Looks like Benkler needs a boost...and so do I. Am I in the wrong place? I'm admitting confusion. To reply to Nbwrites questions, 1) I like keeping Benklers' three sections since it keeps this large text managable and 2) the citation looks "right" to me but I wouldn't necessarily trust me on this [yet]. I'm going to work on Section 3 a bit this AM and then check back in the hours before class to see about adding/editing. Hadassahd (talk) 14:56, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

I agree - Benkler needs a boost. I believe this is the right place for discussion - but I am not sure if Coldwater and Ria# have found this place yet - so maybe in class today we should check in with them in person. I am not done adding to "Reception" section yet - but I probably wont get significant work done on it until tomorrow PM - and I am thinking of subdividing that section somehow, since it will probably be too long otherwise. Is there any holes in the summary section that I can help fill in? Hadassah - you have done the most work on the summary section thus far - let me know if there are any holes i should start to help fill - it is a BIG book to summarize. Nbwrites (talk) 20:33, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Hello everyone! Quick question for everyone: In the "reception" section of the article, do you think there are way too many quotes? Should I try and summarize the quotes into regular written text with a citation? Let me know what you think! Nbwrites (talk) 23:27, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi Nbwrites -- I think only the Benkler respose to V... is too long and I'm going to cut it a bit. The rest of the quotes do not strike me as overkill. Thanks for finding them, I appreciate that they create a dialogue and share criticism on the text.Hadassahd (talk) 02:23, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Move it into the article space

I'm not sure anymore where the most current sandbox is - I think this is it, but you all should put each of your sections into the article space! I would encourage you to each put the sections you wrote in. Teamwork. Also it looks better to have multiple authors in the contribs.--Theredproject (talk) 01:59, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

The current sandbox should still be User:Nbwrites/sandbox - we were attempting earlier today to coordinate the "moving", and thus far our plan is to do as you said - for each person to move over the things they wrote. I already moved the info box over (which was not a big deal), but was going to wait to move the "Reception" section until some the "summary" section has been moved in, just so it makes more sense in the interim. Nbwrites (talk) 02:15, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Final Steps for Article Merging

Okay everyone, I figured out what is going on. Ever since Ria4983 said she moved the page, I was very confused, because I kept going to The Wealth of Networks in the article space, and none of our sandbox work was there. SO...I finally figured out that in an attempt to move the content, Riad4983 moved everything into the wikipedia namespace (So that it showed up as "Wikipedia:The Wealth of Networks", NOT into the article space (which would show up simply as "The Wealth of Networks"). And although I appreciate Ria4983's initiative, this is not where we want the article to end up (it needs to end up in the article space), and there are a few reasons why we need to do things differently on this second try. So there are a few steps I have taken to fix this, and there are a few things we need to all understand and be on the same page about to move forward:

1. Since the sandbox content was moved to the wrong place, I moved everything back into the sandbox (User:Nbwrites/sandbox)
2. In moving forward with this project, we cannot just move the WHOLE thing at once, because then it blows away the edits that were already there when we started, and we need to maintain those.
3. We need to to move things piecemeal into the article space, and everyone should move sections that they mostly contributed. This gives multiple edits to the page, which lends it legitimacy, and it will be less likely to be deleted.
4. The best way to do this piecemeal move is to copy and paste sections, from the Sandbox, directly into the The Wealth of Networks page, with GOOD edit summary comments.
5. I nominated the accidental Wikipedia:The Wealth of Networks for deletion, since, technically, it should not exist.

Okay! So, we CAN do this! I am emailing this exact comment to everyone on our commons message thread, just so it is clear what has happened. I will do some copy/pasting of my own contributions tomorrow, so you should see some edits of mine in the history tomorrow - but just make sure that when you go to move things, you copy and paste SECTIONS from User:Nbwrites/sandbox into The Wealth of Networks. Nbwrites (talk) 04:27, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Quick update on the merging situation: I just copied over the headings in the Summary section, and the first sentence of each section, as well as the Reception heading and the first paragraph, just to get the ball rolling. I don't want anyone to feel as though I am stealing their content, but I did want get things going and get something into the actual page - so when everyone starts copying over their sections in the Summary, please feel free to copy-paste the whole paragraph (including the first sentence I already put in), so that it shows up as part of your edit history! I didn't delete anything from the sandbox, just so we don't get confused about what goes where - but as soon as the whole thing is merged over into the actual article space, we should delete things. Nbwrites (talk) 17:01, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Hello again everyone! I found this great website that has a lot of great chapter summaries and extra info on The Wealth of Networks - http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/wealth_of_networks/Main_Page. I was hoping it would be under a compatable license so we could use some of the content as is, but it is not (it is all licensed under Creative Commons Attribution, Non-Commerical, Sharealike). But I thought it would be worth us taking a look at, and see if there is anything about it that we might like to model our wikipedia article after. It is QUITE comprehensive, so I think it might be helpful for us as we attempt to polish our article. Nbwrites (talk) 01:48, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

That's why the reception bit was removed? The 11k of text that was removed looked like it had some good references in it-- ones that you might want to mix in if they also say what that harvard article says, as multiple references are better evidence of notability than a single reference. :) Banaticus (talk) 11:29, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

The wiki created by Harvard Law has nothing to do with what I did to the reception section - I copied the "Reception" section from the sandbox (located at User:Nbwrites/sandbox) and pasted it into The Wealth of Networks article space. Then I went back and deleted the reception section from the sandbox, just so there wouldn't be a doubling of the content... does that make sense? Is that proper wikipedia-etiquette? I was under the impression that it was not good to have exact copies of content in more than one place, but I could be wrong! From what I can tell, other chunks of content from the summary section that have been copied into the article space have not been deleted from the sandbox yet. I only posted the link to the Harvard Law wiki content b/c I thought it would be interesting for us to see how they summarized / organized things, with the understanding that it is not under a compatible license to copy/paste as is into wikipedia.Nbwrites (talk) 20:13, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Just want to let everyone know: I checked that all our content for The Wealth of Networks that was in my sandbox was successfully copied over into the article space, and I have removed/deleted everything from the sandbox for three reasons:

1. so that there is not a duplicate of content that is already in the article space
2. So that we do all future editing IN the article space, and
3. so that my sandbox is free for other projects.

Great work everyone! Let's keep polishing it up so that it becomes a super stellar article! Nbwrites (talk) 16:08, 13 March 2012 (UTC)